SCIENCE 



FEroAT, Januaey 17, 1913 



CONTENTS 



The Change from the Old to the New Botany 

 in the United States: Professor W. G. 

 Fablow 79 



The Simulium-Pellagra Proilem in Illinois: 



Professor Stephen A. Tobbes 86 



Eoanthropus Dawsoni: Professor A. C. Had- 



DON 91 



The Yale Peruvian Expedition of 1912 92 



Soientifio Notes and News . , 94 



University and Educational News 98 



Discussion and Correspondence: — 



A National University at Washington: 

 Kepleb Hott. Neo-vitalism and the Logic 

 of Science: Peofessob Robert Mac- 

 DouGAiL. A Protest: Dr. Hubert Lyman 

 Clark 99 



The Efficiency Nostnim at Harvard 106 



Scientific Boolcs: — 

 Gooch on Chemical Analysis: Professor H. 

 P. Talbot. Browning 's Introduction io 

 the Barer Elements: Professor Charles 

 Baskerville. Barrows on Light, Photom- 

 etry and Illumination: Db. E. C. Crittenden 108 



Special Articles: — 



The Effect of Anesthetics upon Permeabil- 

 ity : Professor W. J. V. Osteehout. Par- 

 tial Sex-linkage in the Pigeon: Calvin B. 

 Beidges. Relativity and Electromagnetic 

 Induction: Peofessob S. J. Barnett .... Ill 



The American Society of Naturalists: Pro- 

 fessor A. L. Teeadwell 114 



The American Mathematical Society: Peo- 

 fessob F. N. Cole 115 



The Ohio Academy of Science: De. L. B. 

 Walton 117 



MSS. intended for publication and books, etc., intended for 

 review should be sent to Professor J. McKeen Cattell, Garrison- 

 On-Hudson, N. Y. 



TEE CHANGE FEOM THE OLD TO THE 

 NEW BOTANY IN THE UNITED STATES^ 



It is generally known that in the seven- 

 ties there was a sudden development of the 

 study of botany in this country. Just how 

 and why this sudden development took 

 place at that particular date is, I suspect, 

 not clearly recognized, at least by our 

 younger men. Prom histories and reports 

 of progress they can learn the main facts, 

 but those who, as students or instructors, 

 have lived through the transitional period 

 when the old botany was changed into the 

 new are in a better position to appreciate 

 the underlying causes. There are, how- 

 ever, few such persons still living and the 

 small number is not wholly due to the nor- 

 mal death rate. The relative number of 

 botanists was smaller then than now and it 

 will not do to assume that this was owing 

 solely to the lack of attractions in the bot- 

 any of the day. The main reason was that 

 one could hardly expect to earn a living 

 as a botanist. When I graduated from 

 college in 1866 and wished to become a 

 botanist, Professor Gray told me that I 

 ought to study medicine first because the 

 possibility of gaining a living by botany 

 was so small that one should always have 

 a regular profession to fall back upon. In 

 fact, at that time medicine was practically 

 the gate through which it was necessary 

 to pass in order to enter the field of bot- 

 any. Some years later De Bary told me 

 that, when he was a young man, there was 

 a similar state of things in Germany and, 

 although desiring to devote himself to bot- 



' Address of retiring president of the Botanical 

 Society of America, given at the Botanists ' Dinner, 

 Cleveland, January 1, 1913. 



